Let’s face it: we are two different movements for openness/replicability
It is time to accept that we already are two separate movements: open/replicable scientists who want to include identity politics and social justice in the work for increased openness or replicability, and open/replicable scientists who don’t.
Individuals and organisations focusing on open and/or replicable science without being part of justice oriented science do not have to be proponents of diversity and inclusion, but they can be. An example of this from the open source software movement is that the Linux Foundation employs a Code of Conduct (CoC) that strongly promotes diversity and inclusion. It is thus possible to be committed to, and even heavily engaged in, work toward improved diversity and inclusion (or other topics such as climate) while at the same time preferring to keep these topics out of the work for open and replicable science.
“The Free Software movement and the Open Source movement are today separate movements with different views and goals, although we can and do work together on some practical projects.”, Stallman wrote in Why “Free Software” is better than “Open Source”. I envision the same future for open and replicable science: we will continue to work together on projects where we have overlapping interests, but work separately on projects where a commitment to justice oriented science is needed. Not because we feel bad about each other or to avoid conflicts per se, but because we sometimes do have very different goals and methods.